Category: What do you think?

Have you ever heard someone claim that religion is bigoted and divisive?  This claim is often made by those who fail to see the difference between bigotry concerning religion and religious bigotry.

Any strongly-held belief can be divisive for those who are intolerant. This includes ideas held by atheists who strongly believe there is no God.  This group was very outspoken in their opposition to U.S. President Barack Obama’s appointment of Dr. Francis Collins to head up the National Institutes of Health in 2009.  It did not matter to them that he led the team that mapped the human genome, or that he has never made a scientific proclamation based on his religion.  They felt his faith in God alone rendered him not worthy.  This is bigotry concerning religion, but religion isn’t the source of the bigotry.

The problem is refusal by anyone, atheist or believer, to accept that others hold differing beliefs.  The frequent use of loaded language, insults and ad hominem attacks lobbed by non-believers stands as evidence that intolerance is not the result of religion; it’s the result of a flaw in the human condition.

What are your thoughts?

Is it true that Christians would be immoral without the Bible?

One atheist put it this way, “I’m terrified by theists who would be murders and rapists if they didn’t believe in their sky-daddy’s eternal torture dungeon.”

If you look past his obvious loaded language, his retort demonstrates either confusion over what it means to have a moral standard, or at best, a deflection of the idea that non-believers’ morality is nothing more than a matter of preference.

The Bible gives Christians a standard by which one may justify calling something good or bad.  If the Bible is of God, then its pages give us justification to call something moral or immoral.  But, playing devil’s advocate, if the Bible is not from God, then Christians and Atheists alike have only personal preference as morality, and that’s the point.  There is no true morality without God, only preference.

When a non-believer asks why Christians need the Bible to know that murder is wrong, they presuppose that we wouldn’t know without having a belief in God.  I don’t know any Christian who believes that. Romans tells us God’s law is written on our heart. This gives Christians reason to believe that everyone, atheist and Christians, know it is wrong even without having read a single sentence of any book of the Bible.  But by what standard does one use to justify it?  God – or personal preference?  Are these not the only two options?

 

 

 

Have you ever heard someone claim that the Bible says something specific, when in reality, they were projecting something they wanted to prove onto the scripture? To be clear, I’m talking about those who want to prove a point, and to that end they ascribe an  erroneous meaning to the scripture that backs their claim.

I was told of a non-believer who cited Genesis 1:16 as “proof” that the Bible is anti-science.  The author that was cited claimed the Bible tells us the moon creates light rather than reflecting it.  The scripture he referenced says, “God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night.”

I don’t know how anyone could interpret Genesis 1:16 the same way as this non-believer. This scripture doesn’t speak at all to what is generating the light, it simply refers to the moon as a light, something we often do today.  If someone told you they took a walk in the moonlight, would you assume this proves the person taking the stroll has no idea the moon is reflecting the sun?

There must be a reason some are so eager to find a problem with the scripture that they result to non-sense arguments like this.  While some are intentionally misquoting the scripture to win an argument, I believe others are fulfilling  2 Corinthians 4:4 which tells us, “The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.”

What are your thoughts?

Do Christians proclaim what they WANT to believe, or what they actually believe?

This may seem like an odd question, but I’ve encountered it in various forms.  I suspect it comes from a presupposition that man manufactures God to his desire. That is, it assumes that God is just the manifestation man’s craving for there to be a higher power.

Well, it’s true the Bible says we should bring all of our cares and desires to God, but it doesn’t say we should demand them.  The Bible says when we share our feelings with God, we should include, “nevertheless not MY will be done, but God’s will.” Does this sound like a book telling us God is what we want Him to be?

Let’s talk about that desire for there to be a God.  Why do we have that desire? Well, the scripture tells us God’s law is written on our heart weather we recognize it or not, so it’s true that man wants to believe in God, we are designed to have this desire. It is what leads us to Him.

Desire is not evidence of God’s non-existence.  All men get hungry, but this is not evidence that food doesn’t exist.  It is evidence that God’s word is true; His law is written on our heart.  Why else would so many non-related civilizations come up with the idea of God?

What are your thoughts?